It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEW - UFO Hunters Show - April 1, 2009 - Greys Conspiracy

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
*New UFO Hunters on tonight - April 1, 2009

UFO Hunters: The Greys Conspiracy
They are described by hundreds of witnesses as grey-skinned beings: no ears, no nose and bulbous black eyes. Are these so called "Greys" visitors from another planet? The team investigates stories of abductions in two different countries--their harrowing accounts disturbingly similar. In hypnotic regression, eyewitnesses describe being taken aboard alien spacecraft as part of a bizarre program to form "hybrid" beings. The team tracks down potential proof: an unusual, one-of-a-kind skull discovered in a cave in Mexico that bears an eerie resemblance to the Greys described by abductees.




posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
**Reminder: New UFO Hunters show tonight**



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by EclipseReloaded
 


I am beginning to wonder about the sensationalistic path this show is taking. First Dulce, in which they were more interested in the wild theories than proving that the place existed. Now it will be greys. I will watch, but want to see how they go about this one.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by kidflash2008
 


I was quit peeved when they included the gold 'aircraft'/fish(IMHO) trinkets in with the triangle UFO. Especially that it took me an hour or two searching to find the trinket's story (there was that little reference to source material in the show). The trinkets didn't seem to have any logical connection to triangular UFOs in the slightest. Particularly the silly model they drew conclusions from. Even the person who originally made the claims about the trinkets IIRC thought they were probably artistic impressions of aircraft - not things to take literally.


They had a subject (sightings of triangular) UFOs that is interesting, and not unreasonable - even to ET visitation sceptics - , and linked it with garbage. If the show wants to undermine the subject they should keep on going down that slippery slope.

Still, thanks OP, it's something I'll watch. I still enjoy the show, foibles aside.

[edit on 1-4-2009 by jackphotohobby]



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I think if they did a show to everyones expectations it would about 20-30 Hours long and be so boring from all the analytical research information that most of us would turn to shows like UFO Hunters to relieve the pain.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by 38181
 


Heh, I think you're right, and ultimately no show is going to please everyone. In a previous thread here about a post-Dr Ted U.H. show I said I think it's possible the new show will be better for viewers. I stand by that. I still hope they take their role as the most popular (probably) mainstream UFO show seriously, because they're almost screen ambassadors for the subject. I'll still watch it. Even if I shout at the screen occasionally
.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Thanks for the update, I love the show and all the comments thrown at the show I think are unfair. They do with little time, they are not afraid to tackle things like Dulce (I loved that episode), they argue with each other and not all agree with them.

They are doing a fine job and right now its my favourite show.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
I am beginning to wonder about the sensationalistic path this show is taking...Now it will be greys. I will watch, but want to see how they go about this one.


I will have to disagree, Bart. I don't think this is sensational at all. While not a hard nuts-and-bolts type of episode, the abduction phenomenon is an important facet of the larger UFO phenomenon. Whether or not people are really being abducted and whether or not aliens are behind it, the abduction phenomenon is real. Regardless of what may really be driving phenomenon, there is much to be learned from it.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I definitely think its worth a watch. Their coverage is usually quite thorough. Though the ending is typically the usual: "We will never know if the stories are true...." But, I think that they generally present the information available in a fair way.

I am certainly interested in this episode. Also, one wonders why there are so many of these types of programs coming out around now. Is it growing interest? Is it something coming from higher-ups? Is this just CT rambling? Perhaps all of the above.

Anyhow, I'll definitely catch the program tonight.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackphotohobby
Heh, I think you're right, and ultimately no show is going to please everyone.


I think the problem with the show is that they are trying to be all-things to everyone interested in the phenomenon. This is illustrated in the trinkets incident; if they did not cover it, there would be accusations from someone that they are not looking in to all aspects of a particular case.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iago18
Though the ending is typically the usual: "We will never know if the stories are true...." But, I think that they generally present the information available in a fair way.


That may be the fairest and most pragmatic conclusion they can make. After 60 years we are no closer to solving these mysteries.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


Quite true, but not for lack of trying.

I wonder how stonewalled these guys are when they try to investigate. I mean, more than they let on. How much of their info leaking is just disinfo? I don't claim that it is or isn't I am, genuinely, interested in knowing what they are getting away with reporting.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Yeah, I just mentioned this in the "alien humanoid" thread, as I hope it turns out to be a good episode. Sometimes they're good, and sometimes they're incredibly boring, with little to no info.

Only time will tell. I'll ready a bowl of popcorn.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
jus a quick question,...

what channel is iton, and what time please???













posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


True, but I suppose what I found most galling about it was the limited way in which they explored the trinkets relative to the amount of time dedicated to them. They had solitary expert comment on the subject, and the shows sceptic's rebuttals took the form of "well... come on, it's not true!!". A kind of knee-jerk scepticism I think sucks as much as unthinking believers. I like to think that when I'm sceptical of something can explain why. The questions he asked and the assumptions he made after that test were less sceptical than many 'believers' on ATS (inverted commas because I don't think it is black & white as that).

What aspect of the trinkets do you think relates to triangular UFO sightings?

It's not a hypothesis I've heard anywhere before so I'm sceptical that anyone would miss it.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
History Channel
10PM Easter



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackphotohobby
A kind of knee-jerk scepticism I think sucks as much as unthinking believers. I like to think that when I'm sceptical of something can explain why


I agree. Knee-jerk skepticism is detrimental to science-advocacy and does nothing but further entrench positions on both sides.


Originally posted by jackphotohobby
What aspect of the trinkets do you think relates to triangular UFO sightings?


I don't myself.



posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Well, working in a Engineering department in high tech manufacturing of FPGAs, and always putting on my 'try to find the root cause' cap on everyday at work...I'd really like to see some hard data/testimony (if at all possible) how this whole abduction got started, and how we got to where we are today.

Personally, I'm a little let down on the show in the fact that there's so much data out there to gleen from to do a show every single week, all we get here in OR is re-runs till today....

I totally understand the amount of data, stories they have to go through to make the episode enough to stay on the air. However, from some of the posts I've read, especially about the airport (on the tip of my tongue) where a UFO blew a hole through the clouds and all Hunters could do is show nothing simlar to what all the reports of witnesses have stated.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo
I totally understand the amount of data, stories they have to go through to make the episode enough to stay on the air. However, from some of the posts I've read, especially about the airport (on the tip of my tongue) where a UFO blew a hole through the clouds and all Hunters could do is show nothing simlar to what all the reports of witnesses have stated.


The airport is O'Hare International airport. A new video surfaced which claims to show the craft.

O'Hare U.F.O new footage

I saw it reported for a second in the media but they laughed at it. It's not smoking gun proof.


I think UFO hunters as a show has been destroyed. It was analytical and scientific, but I watched the most recent episode on "The Greys Conspiracy." The research done was extremely minimal. They talked to one eyewitness, about an event only they claim to have seen. When you are dealing with eyewitnesses that have no physical evidence you have to find many, many eyewitnesses in order to make it substantial to skeptics. It would have been better if they talked to 5-7 eye witnesses who described similar events. They used to always talk to multiple eyewitnesses, why did they not this time?

They then showed short clips from the Betty and Barney hill interviews. But gave little analysis besides saying that something happened to them. It was good to see the interviews but more analysis of it would have been better.

The investigation into the starchild skull seemed weak at best. The substantial part was the analysis which determined that the mitochondria showed the mother was human but that analysis could not say whether the father was human or not.

The part on the starchild skull that was weak was the art director's interpretation of what this individual might have looked like. He appeared to make it on artistic interpretation and not any scientific process. I might have missed something though, please correct me if so.

I liked how they used to actually investigate before. Now it just seems like two guys Bill Birnes and Kevin Cook arguing without either of them presenting any evidence.

What happened to the Narrator? Without him the show feels empty.

Without a narrator it seems like they are moving away from documentary style and going for a reality show feel. I hope they are not intentionally doing this.

Are they suffering from budget cuts or is this some "new direction" they are trying to take the show?

[edit on 2-4-2009 by Studious]



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Anywhere on the net where we(non-us) can watch recorded episodes?
Thanx.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join